...then I'm sure we can look forward to a multitude of Special Editions with various tweaks. Guns will be digitally replaced with walkie talkies, walkie talkies will be replaced with guns, and eventually Shia LaBeouf will be digitally replaced with an character that's more universally loved and admired, such as Jar Jar Binks.
Sometimes electronic components (such as Xboxes I presume) get a bit scuffed during the repair process. There's probably some quality control guy in the outsourced MS Xbox repair center whose job is to "clean up" any newly-repaired Xbox before the box is shipped back to the owner. A quick wipe with an acetone-soaked rag will remove any permanent ink, paint, etc. in a jiffy. Sure it's stupid to clean the exterior for an obviously intentionally-decorated case, but hey, he was just doing his job.
"Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
That's a horrible idea. What the hell are they supposed to write? "Write down a linked list object, you have 30 seconds on the clock!"
ITSATRAP!
Er, ahem. Sorry. Seriously though, you need to write down a linked list object? That's an easy one, it should only take a few seconds...Lemme see...
import java.util.*; ...
List linkedList = new LinkedList();
There you go, 'linkedList' is a linked list object, and it only took you a few seconds to write it down on the board. That should be all the answer they need, because if you're a knowledgeable object-oriented programmer who knows Java then that's the answer I'd expect. Don't give me some data structure BS you learned back in college, you'll rarely (if ever) need to write your own fundamental stuff (such as linked lists, etc) from scratch.
Any game which depends on DX10 will not run on XP or W2K platforms. I can't see developers embracing DX10/Vista for fear of excluding a large portion of the gaming market.
Mod parent down; the post is spreading disinformation.
Most major games released during the next couple of years will have both DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 code paths. If running on anything less than Vista, the games will automatically select the DX9 code path. The graphics may not look as fancy, but you'll be able to play them on XP and Vista.
How come this device died and disapeared for centuries? Given the Egyptians knowledge of the earths equinox, this was the key to discover America way before Colombus did.
Many people forget that the Vikings discovered (and even *colonized*) America way before Columbus did (about 500 years before Columbus, actually). They called it "Vinland". It's possible that many other cultures found America before Columbus did, too. Apparently there is evidence the Chinese were here long before Columbus.
> Atheism and religion are flip sides of the same coin.
No, they are not.
Yes they are, and I'll explain why in a moment...
They are exact opposites. Atheism is not a religion, and never will be. <snip> Gods and godesses are fabrications of the human mind.
You say [Gg]od[s] don't exist. Show me the proof that [Gg]od[s] is/are a fabrication. Until you open the box and see whether Schrödinger's [Gg]od[s] is there or not, you don't know with any certainty whether [Gg]od[s] exist, and unfortunately it's currently impossible to know. Yet you have a belief without really knowing any provable truth.
Basically, it boils down to this:
religous aka theist: You have no proof, but you believe that [Gg]od[s] DOES exist
atheist: You have no proof, but you believe that [Gg]od[s] does NOT exist (i.e., flip side of the above bullet point)
agnostic: You have no proof, so you say that you have no idea whether [Gg]od[s] exists or not...You have no belief one way or the other
According to the Wikipedia page on atheism, some philosophers have redefined agnostic to be a subtype of atheist. Regardless, those philosophers are not using the conventional definitions of angosticsm and atheism, IMO.
They exist only as considerations in the minds of those considering them. That is the truth, but it is one which most people will never admit to themselves, and will bitterly reject in any way possible those who try to convince them of it.
Wow, you must have a very firm unshakable belief to be so confident in something that's not provably true nor false.
>> Atheism is a religion and it has its own dogma, you know.
> Yes, just as miserliness is charity, abstention is addiction, > and pacifism is aggression. In other words, only > in the minds of the mentally unsound.
Jeez, I wish I had mod points today. Your obliquely ad hominem attack on the "mentally unsound" author of your parent post is pretty sad considering that s/he was right. Atheism requires a firm belief that [Gg]od[s] do not exist. There is no proof that [Gg]od[s] DO exist, just as there is no proof that [Gg]od[s] DON'T exist. Therefore, atheism requires a belief system just as a religion requires a belief system. Atheism and religion are flip sides of the same coin.
So, when your parent poster claimed that atheism is a religion and has its own dogma, s/he was correct; s/he simply didn't explain it in detail.
The only view that really requires no belief nor faith is agnosticism. In fact, I suspect that most Slashdotters who are responding to the OP are actually agnostics, not atheists as they profess to be. Most people don't seem to catch the subtle difference between agnostic and atheist, but that difference is actualy quite profound.
OSX does not run on generic (aka non-Apple) i386 and there are too many machines in place already.
But OS X *could* run on generic i386 hardware if Apple chose to remove the Apple-only hardware restrictions on OS X within the European market. If something happened that prevented MS from selling Windows in Europe, perhaps Apple would release an "open" version of OS X and try to fill the "Windows vacuum"?
This would be especially useful if the rumored Windows binary compatibility layer within OS X 10.5 turns out to be more than just a rumor. Just a thought.
the older I got, the more grey there was in my beard, the harder it got to find jobs. <snip> Once in a while I get an interview... It ends as soon as they see that I am "old"...
Versus the competition, OQO already looks obsolete
on
OQO Examined
·
· Score: 1
Although I like the OQO form factor a bit better than the FlipStart, it appears that the FlipStart will have the upper hand when it comes to market.
For example, the FlipStart has a larger, higher-res display (5.6" 1024x600) than the OQO (5" 800x480). The FlipStart has USB 2.0, the OQO has USB 1.1. The FlipStart has a 30 GB hard drive, the OQO a 20. Most of the other specs for the two units are just about the same (e.g., both support a docking cradle).
Furthermore, the FlipStart does all this while being just fractionally larger than the OQO. The only things that the OQO has that the FlipStart lacks is a FireWire port and a digitizer pen.
Thus, if the OQO and FlipStart hit the market at roughly the same time at roughly the same price, the FlipStart will eat it for breakfast.
The other thing that worries me about OQO is the exposed screen. Having the screen exposed on the outside of the unit seems like a bunch of scratches waiting to happen.
That's true for Wintel PCs. Apple uses a 1 GHz front side bus (FSB) in select desktop computers. So, Wintel PCs are stuck at 8/10ths of Apple's bus speed, for now.
I have a beige G3/266 sitting right next to me. It's maxed out with 768MB of RAM and runs OS X 10.2 at an "acceptable" speed for casual use. However, I only use it occassionally, and it spends most of its days as purely a web server (a task for which a beige G3 is well suited, at least for my limited web site).
BUT if I had to use a G3/266 as my main home or work machine, I think I would get pretty frustrated by its performance. Rather than upgrading your existing G3, you're FAR better off selling your G3 on eBay and putting the money towards as used eMac.
BTW, older G3's also make nice print servers, firewalls (check out BrickHouse), etc.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
And don't forget Redmond, WA.
Microsoft (market cap: $275B) is a long way from California and is the world's largest software company by a wide margin. Er, by a wide, Wide, WIDE margin (Oracle market cap: $65B).
I'm not boosting or bashing any particular company here, just making a point that the tech world does not revolve around California.
No. The problem is the 1970s technology made them too high maintenance.
Not quite. Sure, there have been advances in computers, metallurgy, etc, in the interening years since the shuttle fleet was built. But the main problem was the short-sightedness of the Congressmen who controlled NASA's budget while the shuttle was being designed. The reason we wound up with a shuttle with so many shortcomings, problems, delays, etc, is largely due to Congress' having cut the shuttle development budget SEVEN TIMES during the Carter administration (as documented by a later government commission).
Another problem is the politicized distribution of subcontractors for any major NASA undertaking. Pieces of large projects are distributed among contractors in as many states as possible. This ensures that every Congressman's state gets "a piece of the action". A good example is the construction of the solid rocket boosters in Utah. Because the boosters were made in Utah, they had to be built in sections (so they could then be shipped to Florida for launch). If the boosters had originally been built in Florida, the boosters could have simply been floated like barges from their construction site over to the Cape. There would have been no O-ring seals to fail, which is what ultimately doomed Challenger.
The shuttle fleet we have now is definitely the result of subcontractor gerrymandering and repeated budget cuts. Even though it would have cost more up front to build an 'ideal' shuttle fleet (without solid rocket boosters, for example), we would have been better off in the long run. We would likely have saved some astronauts' lives, indirectly. And we wouldn't be faced with the prospect of scrapping the existing fleet to build the fleet we should have built in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
...then I'm sure we can look forward to a multitude of Special Editions with various tweaks. Guns will be digitally replaced with walkie talkies, walkie talkies will be replaced with guns, and eventually Shia LaBeouf will be digitally replaced with an character that's more universally loved and admired, such as Jar Jar Binks.
They'll be called "lychees".
Sometimes electronic components (such as Xboxes I presume) get a bit scuffed during the repair process. There's probably some quality control guy in the outsourced MS Xbox repair center whose job is to "clean up" any newly-repaired Xbox before the box is shipped back to the owner. A quick wipe with an acetone-soaked rag will remove any permanent ink, paint, etc. in a jiffy. Sure it's stupid to clean the exterior for an obviously intentionally-decorated case, but hey, he was just doing his job.
"Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
prostitution is the most people-ready business I know
:)
What a great idea for a sig! As a bonus, thousands of searches for "people-ready business" might bring up Slashdot.
Professor Dumbass had the following to say...[snip]
It's "Dumas".
Er, ahem. Sorry. Seriously though, you need to write down a linked list object? That's an easy one, it should only take a few seconds...Lemme see...
import java.util.*;
List linkedList = new LinkedList();
There you go, 'linkedList' is a linked list object, and it only took you a few seconds to write it down on the board. That should be all the answer they need, because if you're a knowledgeable object-oriented programmer who knows Java then that's the answer I'd expect. Don't give me some data structure BS you learned back in college, you'll rarely (if ever) need to write your own fundamental stuff (such as linked lists, etc) from scratch.
Mod parent down; the post is spreading disinformation.
Most major games released during the next couple of years will have both DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 code paths. If running on anything less than Vista, the games will automatically select the DX9 code path. The graphics may not look as fancy, but you'll be able to play them on XP and Vista.
You say [Gg]od[s] don't exist. Show me the proof that [Gg]od[s] is/are a fabrication. Until you open the box and see whether Schrödinger's [Gg]od[s] is there or not, you don't know with any certainty whether [Gg]od[s] exist, and unfortunately it's currently impossible to know. Yet you have a belief without really knowing any provable truth.
Basically, it boils down to this:
- religous aka theist: You have no proof, but you believe that [Gg]od[s] DOES exist
- atheist: You have no proof, but you believe that [Gg]od[s] does NOT exist (i.e., flip side of the above bullet point)
- agnostic: You have no proof, so you say that you have no idea whether [Gg]od[s] exists or not...You have no belief one way or the other
According to the Wikipedia page on atheism, some philosophers have redefined agnostic to be a subtype of atheist. Regardless, those philosophers are not using the conventional definitions of angosticsm and atheism, IMO.Wow, you must have a very firm unshakable belief to be so confident in something that's not provably true nor false.
So, when your parent poster claimed that atheism is a religion and has its own dogma, s/he was correct; s/he simply didn't explain it in detail.
The only view that really requires no belief nor faith is agnosticism. In fact, I suspect that most Slashdotters who are responding to the OP are actually agnostics, not atheists as they profess to be. Most people don't seem to catch the subtle difference between agnostic and atheist, but that difference is actualy quite profound.
OSX does not run on generic (aka non-Apple) i386 and there are too many machines in place already.
But OS X *could* run on generic i386 hardware if Apple chose to remove the Apple-only hardware restrictions on OS X within the European market. If something happened that prevented MS from selling Windows in Europe, perhaps Apple would release an "open" version of OS X and try to fill the "Windows vacuum"?
This would be especially useful if the rumored Windows binary compatibility layer within OS X 10.5 turns out to be more than just a rumor. Just a thought.
the older I got, the more grey there was in my beard, the harder it got to find jobs. <snip> Once in a while I get an interview... It ends as soon as they see that I am "old"...
:)
Here you go, this piece of technology might help you in your next interview.
http://www.justformen.com/home.shtml
For example, the FlipStart has a larger, higher-res display (5.6" 1024x600) than the OQO (5" 800x480). The FlipStart has USB 2.0, the OQO has USB 1.1. The FlipStart has a 30 GB hard drive, the OQO a 20. Most of the other specs for the two units are just about the same (e.g., both support a docking cradle).
Furthermore, the FlipStart does all this while being just fractionally larger than the OQO. The only things that the OQO has that the FlipStart lacks is a FireWire port and a digitizer pen.
Thus, if the OQO and FlipStart hit the market at roughly the same time at roughly the same price, the FlipStart will eat it for breakfast.
The other thing that worries me about OQO is the exposed screen. Having the screen exposed on the outside of the unit seems like a bunch of scratches waiting to happen.
That's true for Wintel PCs. Apple uses a 1 GHz front side bus (FSB) in select desktop computers. So, Wintel PCs are stuck at 8/10ths of Apple's bus speed, for now.
Why would you trust Gentoo more than OpenBSD? After all, OpenBSD is written and audited to be the most secure OS around.
Expose is so amazing, expect Microsoft to "borrow" it in their next OS release.
Don't you mean, "expect Microsoft to innovate it into their next OS release"?I have a beige G3/266 sitting right next to me. It's maxed out with 768MB of RAM and runs OS X 10.2 at an "acceptable" speed for casual use. However, I only use it occassionally, and it spends most of its days as purely a web server (a task for which a beige G3 is well suited, at least for my limited web site). BUT if I had to use a G3/266 as my main home or work machine, I think I would get pretty frustrated by its performance. Rather than upgrading your existing G3, you're FAR better off selling your G3 on eBay and putting the money towards as used eMac. BTW, older G3's also make nice print servers, firewalls (check out BrickHouse), etc.
Microsoft (market cap: $275B) is a long way from California and is the world's largest software company by a wide margin. Er, by a wide, Wide, WIDE margin (Oracle market cap: $65B).
I'm not boosting or bashing any particular company here, just making a point that the tech world does not revolve around California.
Not quite. Sure, there have been advances in computers, metallurgy, etc, in the interening years since the shuttle fleet was built. But the main problem was the short-sightedness of the Congressmen who controlled NASA's budget while the shuttle was being designed. The reason we wound up with a shuttle with so many shortcomings, problems, delays, etc, is largely due to Congress' having cut the shuttle development budget SEVEN TIMES during the Carter administration (as documented by a later government commission).
Another problem is the politicized distribution of subcontractors for any major NASA undertaking. Pieces of large projects are distributed among contractors in as many states as possible. This ensures that every Congressman's state gets "a piece of the action". A good example is the construction of the solid rocket boosters in Utah. Because the boosters were made in Utah, they had to be built in sections (so they could then be shipped to Florida for launch). If the boosters had originally been built in Florida, the boosters could have simply been floated like barges from their construction site over to the Cape. There would have been no O-ring seals to fail, which is what ultimately doomed Challenger.
The shuttle fleet we have now is definitely the result of subcontractor gerrymandering and repeated budget cuts. Even though it would have cost more up front to build an 'ideal' shuttle fleet (without solid rocket boosters, for example), we would have been better off in the long run. We would likely have saved some astronauts' lives, indirectly. And we wouldn't be faced with the prospect of scrapping the existing fleet to build the fleet we should have built in the first place.